how faithful is the 2003 peter pan movie to the book

And also how willingly Wendy gave him the motherly comfort. And it would've been perfect addition had they not hidden the mother issue of Peter's and how much it affected his feelings and relationship with Wendy.

I think the way they had Peter too feel romantically for Wendy was a good addition since they were pre-teenagers instead of the 5-year olds they originally are. It would've been great if this most loyal adaptation would've gone so loyal that it had made clear Neverland is a place inside sleeping children's heads and everything they dream to be there, is there for real should they ever get to Neverland awake. Though I think romance in a darker, creepy neverland would've been even better. It's beautifully done and serves the romance theme they added. Neverland is way too magical but then again that's ok. As do all the other character versions and the actors were chosen well. This version of Hook does justice to the original character. Hook has his comical touch but it lurks in there, it's not the main point. Peter Pan (2003): This adaptation finally respects the characters. The only thing really good in this film is the atmosphere of Neverland, which isn't too magical but a little creepy. Good entertainment but doesn't do justice to the book and the characters. This film is too alternate universe with illogic and thoughtless storyline.

I also don't believe he would've truly grown up for anyone but Wendy, while this film suggests he loved Wendy's granddaughter enough to give up Neverland and face his issues. I think Peter's also grown up into too radically out-of-character personality but at least it's excused with the fact he doesn't remember anything from the time before he decided to stay in this world instead of going back to Neverland. In example, the film claims Peter didn't want to grow up because 'everyone who grow up have to die some day', while it's literally said in Peter's words in the book that he thinks of dying as an awfully big adventure, and that it's the living in a grown up world he wanted to avoid in the first place. but I think their theories and analysing on Peter's psychological issues with the whole not wanting to grow up thing are not even trying to be logical or base on what's told in the book. The original script focuses on Peter's past a bit more. And must be given kudos for actually taking notice of the mothe rissue of Peter's but that is actually only refered to in couple of lines. Hook is still a bit too much of a clown although fortunately not even nearly as much as the cartoon version. Isn't this a Disney film too? At least it could be since again, this film isn't even trying to care about the original story and characters. This cartoon just couldn't get more disgracaful and far from the book. In short the cartoon ignored everything that matters and also little original details such as the thimble and acorn symbolizing kisses. The Darling parents don't even notice their children are gone, which is a MAJOR hole in the story. Wendy's a babbling idiot and in Peter they ignore all his issues and most of his personality features all in all and have made him some kind of an elf instead of a human boy. And even though he is the puppy dog in this cartoon, Hook still fears it like crazy, which makes poor Hook even more pathetic character. The crocodile is some stupid, drooling puppy dog type of thing, when it's supposed to be big, scary monster.

The characters themselves have been disgraced - Hook is a total coward and a clown, when originally he's supposed to be this cruel, vile and truly scary villain even if with slightly comical touch. It just is there without any point to it. Most importantly this film totally ignores especially Peter's mother issue, and the whole growing up thing is also ery shallowly put. I can't believe the children's hospital, which held the copyrights back then, allowed Walt Disney PIctures to do this. And yet sadly, the Disney cartoon is what people think Peter Pan is. The Disney cartoon: Seems to have taken only, and ONLY the never-grow-up theme and disgraced or completely everything (else.) Especially themes that matter. What basic themes do you think the movies added/removed compared to the book? Simply because it goes much deeper with everything an dthe lack of two-way-romance makes it even more unique than it already is with everything else. But if I really really HAD to make my pick, I would pick the book. I can't pick a favorite really because they're so different yet so similiar. First of all, I can not rank the original book and the 2003 film in which one is better.

How faithful is the 2003 peter pan movie to the book